Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Happy New Year to you and yours! I'm rebuilding a T-19 transmission for my Jeep CJ-7, replacing the T-5.  Assuming the gears and case are in usable condition, I have a core.  

I've read the T18 section of the CJ Rebuilder's Manual, and I have the Novak rebuild guide as well. From what I've seen, it certainly seems more basic than the T5. The mass is going to be a challenge if anything needs to be pressed into or out of the case!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Bulky, yes, but the T-19 is basic and a traditional truck design.  Without the overdrive, it's much simpler...You'll be a truck mechanic this time around.

Happy New Year, you'll get that T-19 in the works soon!

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I took delivery of a very dirty T19 yesterday.  So much for being powerwashed...at any rate, it still had a shifter attached so I was able to shift it and spin the gears.  Turns out it's the 5.1:1 ratio first gear.  That was not supposed to be an option behind a gas 460ci 4X4 in 1985, but it's anybody's guess what might have changed in the last 32 years. Could be the data about ford T19 applications was wrong, or that truck could have received a new transmission somewhere along the way. 

I've actually decided the 5.1:1 first gear is probably the best option for my use.  It will still be usable on the street (and even better if I go to 35" tires) and provides me about a 26% lower crawl ratio in 1st with no other changes.  I may still swap in a 4:1 kit into the D300 at a later time, but the budget doesn't support it at this time after the adapter package, a rebuild kit, a new clutch friction disk (different diameter input shaft), etc.

All the parts are on their way, so I hope to be able to dig into this project over the next week or two to be ready for an off-road trip to Alabama in February.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Terrific, 60Bubba...You hit a home run!  Yes, your logic is spot on, you'll have a low and synchromesh first gear when needed and a usable 2nd gear for normal start-ups.  The overall reduction may save the added work of the 4:1 Dana 300 transfer case kit, not to mention cost savings as you note.  You've overcome the shortfall of a T-18 with non-synchro first gear!

You'll be very happy with this approach, and when you do build the 4.0L into a 4.6L stroker, you have the optimal transmission stamina and right ratios for that build.  If a light refresh will bring the T-19 to as-new condition, you're in business!  I'm excited, and you should be, too...Congrats on this rarer find.

Loose ends:

1) So what bellhousing works with this transmission?  Do you need the T176/T150 style 4.2L bellhousing, or will the T-5 housing suffice?  A good used T176/150 housing should be floating around in someone's Jeep parts stack.  A new T176/T150 replacement bellhousing is also available in the aftermarket.

2) You change the clutch disk to the Ford T-19 input splines, matching your current pressure plate diameter.  The T-19 input shaft's stick out length suffices, right?  

3) If the clutch cover remains the same, the stock Jeep type T.O. bearing will work if the T-19's front bearing retainer diameter is a match...Otherwise, you need a T.O. bearing that fits the Ford retainer collar and also matches with the clutch cover fingers.

4) You need a crankshaft pilot bearing with the correct O.D. for the Jeep crankshaft bore and the right I.D. to fit the T-19 input shaft's nose end.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the MidSouth had a "severe winter storm" today.  Vicious system dumped at leas 3/4" in less than eight hours :) Around here, though that paralyzes things.  Navy base had delayed reporting that turned into a closure, so after pulling a nice lady in a Mercedes S550 on summer tires out of a ditch with the Titan, I got some time to work on the T19. 

I'll see if I can answer some of your questions

1. This does require the T150/T176 bellhousing, but we've got a guy in my Jeep club that has a few laying around, so I think I scored there.

2. The T19 and the T5 both used 10 spline input shafts, but the T5 was 1 1/8" while the T19 is 1 1/16"  Bummer.  Thought I would get away with the same clutch I just replaced.  I was able to source the correct friction disk along with the transfer case adapter, so that is set.

2 A. As for stick out length, I'm slightly worried there.  The T5 is about 7 1/8", but the T19 is only 6 5/8" or so.  I really don't know how far into the crank bore the input shaft stuck, so this could be an issue.  I guess it will also matter whether or not the new bellhousing is exactly the same depth or not, since that also changes effective input shaft stick out, does it not?

3. Front bearing retainer overall diameter AND throwout bearing tube (or whatever it's called) diameter are an exact match, so the Centerforce T/O bearing I just bought should be usable.

4. I also got the pilot bushing along with the adapter.  I.D. is about .67 to match the T19, O.D. is the same as the one I'm removing obviously--maybe 1" or so?

 

IMG_2854.jpg

IMG_2855.jpg

IMG_2856.JPG

IMG_2860.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Wow, 60Bubba...From the looks of the photos and video, you have a real find here.  Pictures worth a thousand words, especially the comparison between the T-19 and diminutive T-5...You're all set here and should be very pleased!

Nothing more than a light refresh will bring this transmission to as-new condition...

Regarding your comments:  "2 A. As for stick out length, I'm slightly worried there.  The T5 is about 7 1/8", but the T19 is only 6 5/8" or so.  I really don't know how far into the crank bore the input shaft stuck, so this could be an issue.  I guess it will also matter whether or not the new bellhousing is exactly the same depth or not, since that also changes effective input shaft stick out, does it not?"

Yes, the bellhousing depth will determine the fit/stick out length requirements.  Start with the depth (stack height) comparison between the two Jeep bellhousings.  The T150/T176 housing may be shallower, which could account for the difference.  If not, there are adapter crankshaft pilot bushings that stick out further from the crankshaft.  As long as 1) the pilot bearing is stable, 2) the input/clutch gear splines are fully engaged with the new clutch disk splines and 3) the disk hub and clutch release fingers clear the adapter pilot bearing's face, you're good.  Make sure the release bearing travels safely fore-and-aft on the front bearing retainer, fully supported over its range of travel.

Let us know about the stack height comparison between the T5 bellhousing and the T150/176 bellhousing...This could make up the difference.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

I started the disassembly of the T19 this afternoon.  I got the input shaft out without too much trouble, though the small snap rings were a pain as always.

The output shaft has me stopped.  I attempted to use the chisel method depicted in the Rebuilder's Manual.  It seems to have moved the bearing out about 3/16", but no further.  I also tried using a bearing separator in the lip of the bearing with the press against the end of the output shaft.  I didn't apply a whole lot of force, as I'm not 100% sure I'm pressing on the correct surface.  This method didn't move the bearing at all.  I wasn't expecting it to be this difficult to remove.

IMG_2871.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...Hate to spend your money again, but the optimal tool of choice for this is a Posi-Lock puller.  Here is the website and their transmission bearing pullers, note the specific (thin-tipped) jaws that will actually fit the snap-ring groove of your bearing: http://www.posilock.com/products/manual-pullers/transmission-pullers.  You would need enough depth on the stem/tower to work with your shaft's length, which may be an issue in this application.  I have a #208 Posi-Lock that has two jaws that are tipped too thick for a snap-ring groove, so I get to invest in thin-tipped jaws for this tool at some point.  Obviously, a 3-jaw Posi-Lock puller with thin tipped arms would be more effective but also more costly.

Note that the force with the Posi-Lock or even your bearing spreader applies against the outer race of the caged ball bearing; this puts stress on the balls and cage.  You know the old sanction about pressure on the bearing's outer race, there is a risk of a worn or defective bearing blowing apart and taking your eye out or whatever.  Despite this, all pullers and spreaders place stress at the outer bearing race, and the iron transmission case bore should contain the bearing's outer race when the spreader is positioned against the case like you illustrate.  

Are there any parts interfering with the output/mainshaft moving into the case—like the cluster gear needing to be dropped?  If there is no other way in the disassembly sequence to remove the mainshaft and its bearing from the case without damaging or forcing parts, and if you're following the proper "textbook" disassembly sequence, the T-19 case is iron and should be stout enough to support this force.  The force should be evenly distributed over the bearing spreader.  Keep checking the bearing spreader tension to make sure it is not slipping out of the snap ring groove.

For this kind of procedure, I use a tall bearing press (visualize the Harbor Freight bottle jack presses) and a bearing spreader as you show it here.  Tightly pinch the snap ring groove with the spreader while pressing against the end of the shaft.  (Place a softer mild steel block between the press stem and the shaft to protect the shaft's splined end.)  Evenly applied pressure should move the shaft through the bearing, and yes, the force required can often be unnerving.

Also make sure the transmission's opposite face is placed squarely on your press plates to provide a straight push on the mainshaft.  Wear safety goggles, use caution, etc.  Once the shaft starts moving, it should pass steadily through the bearing.

I see your use of C-clamps to squeeze the bearing separator/spreader together.  The nuts on the spreader threads are not visible, it appears that the clamps are taking the place of the spreader's two nuts due to the wide spread of the tool halves.  The snap ring groove is narrow, keep an eye on the two clamps and see that they remain tight and secure.

Moses 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

That is definitely a nice puller!  We used another expensive option on my differentials, a Yukon clamshell puller.  Neither option is really in the budget right now, unless nothing else works.  I'm going to use my new borescope to look at the bottom of the mainshaft to see if there is any interference with the countershaft before I go forward with any more pressure to remove the bearing.

You correctly noted that I was using C-clamps to hold the two halves of the bearing separator together.  That was because the bolts were not long enough for this hefty bearing.  I'm going to get some longer bolts or some All-Thread before I proceed. I'm also going to look for a larger diameter separator to spread out the forces on the case and bearing, though I am going to replace the bearing regardless with the rebuild kit.

On a separate note, it looks like Mother Nature is eing pretty uncooperative in your neck of the woods.  Hope you and yours are staying out of harm's way as these storms cycle through.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Good idea to make sure that the counter gear is not preventing movement of the mainshaft under force...Are you following the "factory" disassembly instructions for the T-19?  With the 1st/2nd synchronizer design, the counter gear is different than the T-18.  

If you find there is counter gear interference and still must remove the shaft from the bearing with a press, make spacers to place beneath your spreader at the rear of the transmission case.  Move the bearing out the 3/16" or so that you describe, then re-shim the spreader.  Carefully press a small amount at a time, building up the spacers beneath the spreader.  Each time, press slightly and keep the shaft from interfering with the cluster gear...Or can you simply remove the counter-shaft and lower the counter gear to the bottom of the case to achieve adequate clearance?

Note:  I have manuals on the T19, including Ford OEM.  If you don't have thorough details, ask and I'll provide insight here...

Recent weather at the Reno/Sparks/Tahoe Area and Sierra has been cold, heavy storms, much snow then heavy rain that washed snow to 8000 feet elevation.  The Truckee, Carson and Walker Rivers, plus many local creeks like Six Mile Canyon near Virginia City, have been flooding.  Reno/Sparks was hit hard, flooding east to Lockwood.  We're on higher ground at Fernley, 30 miles east of Sparks.  Today was warm enough to see the balance of our recent foot of snow disappear completely, mostly washed away by unusually heavy rain and high wind at the front end of our next wave of snow storms.  

Hey, what can I say, "It's winter at the Eastern Sierra!"  I can remember the really hard winters of the 'sixties and early 'seventies at Carson Valley, this is mild by comparison.  Unfortunately, the current rain and flooding have been an issue for many in the region...We're safe and sound, thanks for inquiring.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Jeep club had our first official meeting of the year today.  One of our members who hoards CJ parts brought a couple old bellhousings.  Turns out one of them was a T150 housing.  They mate up to the T-19 and are one of the recommended parts for the T-18/19 conversion. 

Our meeting was at an off-road shop owned by one of our members.  His space is next door to a powder coating operation lots of folks use around Memphis.  The owner happened to be at the meeting so I was able to walk over and drop off the bellhousing.  $25 and I'll have a freshly media-blasted conversion bellhousing.  Score!  He also offered to blast and powdercoat the T-19 for $75.  I may do that if time allows.

Planning to get some garage time in tomorrow to re-attack that output bearing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...If you do powder coat the T-19, mask off the front and rear mating faces.  Powder coat is tough but not that tough.  The flex and torque of bellhousing to transmission faces, or the rear T-19 case mating surface at the transfer case adapter, can lead to movement and hardware loosening over time.  I use quality engine paint and always go very lightly with the paint at mating faces, just enough coverage to protect against surface rust.

Some powder coat shops are aware of this and use discretion with the powder coating.  Others think more is better.  I do not powder coat frames or body panels.  Rust can form under the powder coating without the usual exfoliation signs found with primer and paint.  I learned this from a marine/boat service shop at San Diego years ago; they refused to put powder coating on ship and boat railings.  If rust formed under the durable powder coating, nobody knew it until the railing gave way, then "Man overboard!"

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points Moses.  I have avoided powder coat on most things because it's really difficult to touch up.  Seems like everyone these days sells their bumpers, rock sliders, etc. powder coated.  I'd rather get those kinds of parts bare and rattle can them so I can fix the inevitable scrapes. That's not much of a concern on the T-19, but I certainly don't want to hold in the rust.

I really like the Hammerite paint I used on the frame and axles.  It bonds with light rust as long as the scale is removed and apparently does a good job converting it chemically.  I will likely use that since I already have it and can control when it gets coated that way!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I managed to remove the output shaft bearing today.  It was not an elegant process.  I ended up grinding enough of the bearing races away to pull out the balls one at a time.  The outer race came right out after that, and I was able to get my bearing separator in behind the inner race.  A couple cycles of pressing and shimming behind the separator jaws and it was done.

Now for the bad news.  As I feared, I got abrasive grit inside the case.  I can feel it in either the countershaft or the idler.  Not much, but a little grittiness that wasn't there before.  I REALLY didn't want to drop the countershaft. 

I figured I would just find a shop with a big parts cleaner to submerge the case and clean it up while also flushing out the bearings, but I swear every time I try to find any kind of machine shop or related services around here, I end up disappointed. So for I found one place in Mississippi that uses thermal cleaning followed by shot peening.  It sounds like that won't do anything to remove the grit in the bearings.  It's also $150. 

Two questions:

1. IF I manage to find a shop with a tank big enough for this case, is dipping it safe for the gears and do you think it will adequately flush the grit out?

2. If I can't find any place to dip this case, do you have a home solution that doesn't involve buying a parts washer? :)

Here is a picture of the new output shaft that is part of the conversion kit to mate the T-19 to the D300.  It's a beast.

IMG_0004.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...The counter gear/cluster has an oiling hole.  Short of removing the cluster gear, here's what I would do:  If you have a home solvent tank, I would run the pressure nozzle into the gear's oiling hole and rock the counter gear back and forth while applying pressurized solvent.  The pressure and solvent should push old oil and any debris out the ends of the counter gear.  You have a modest amount of thrust clearance, and if the grit is small enough, it should flush past the faces of these thrust washers.  Watch for debris.

Tilt the transmission case up and down on its ends and in other directions while pressure flushing the counter gear with solvent.  Finally, use compressed air at the oiling hole to push out remaining solvent.  The combination of solvent and pressure should clean out the cluster bearings and the counter bore.  This does require solvent, pressure and rotating or at least rocking the cluster gear while flushing the gear and case.

Nice adapter shaft...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

No parts cleaner here yet. The boss doesn't want any more tools in the garage, and those things are kinda conspicuous! I ended up driving out the countershaft.  I didn't have any luck finding someone to wash the case, so I pressure washed it after pulling the shaft.  I liberally used fluid film (I think another member posted about it) on the interior to prevent flash rust on the reverse idler shaft and bearings.

I decided pulling that shaft out and getting rid of all the grit once and for all was the quickest way to give myself peace of mind.  Everything seems to be clean and smooth now.  At least all the small parts will also be new. While I have it out I'll blow out that oiling hole just to make sure nothing is hiding up there.

I have some less than clear images of the parts blow up, but I'm a little unclear on the order of all the different washers on the countershaft.  If you have a source for a clear image of how they all stack up that would be great.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...Here is a PDF of the mid-'eighties era Ford/Warner T19B and T19D parts schematic.  I added the counter gear bearing and thrust orientation image.  Zoom in for details:

Ford T19B and T19D Schematic Drawing and Countershaft Bearing Orientation.pdf

Trust this will demystify your parts orientation...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made some minor progress on the transmission rebuild this weekend.  The T150 bellhousing came back nice and clean from sand blasting.  I sprayed on a coat of primer and some satin black. 

The case shed 30+ years of mud and oil and is about ready for a coat of paint also.  The countershaft and mainshaft are on the bench.  I'll put the counter shaft back in this week and rebuild the mainshaft on the new adapter output shaft.  My TransGel is in the fridge so it'll be nice and thick to hold the 88 needle bearings in place!

IMG_0009.jpg

IMG_0008.jpg

IMG_0007.jpg

IMG_0005.jpg

IMG_0006.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case...You got very lucky on the T-19, it looks great.  The gears and hard parts look good for 300K miles of trouble free driving in a Jeep CJ-7 even with the stroker.  Synchromesh on 1st to boot, yea!

Very nice unit for a bearing and light refresh, glad you tore it down completely.  You'll be much happier in the long run...You're going new brass synchro rings, too?  We can discuss that if you're on the fence...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I did indeed order the full rebuild kit including synchros.  I'm trying to take a couple days off this week to get the work done, but Uncle Sam isn't cooperating just now.  Maybe this Friday...

I did have one question about the gears.  I have a friend in Texas that is an engineer and apparently has a fair amoutn fo experience with industrial drive trains--who knew! He noticed that there is a mark on each tooth of the first gear.  You can see it in the lower right of the second picture above.

I didn't think much of it, but he was concerned about long term durability, especially given the torque transmitted by 1st gear.  What do you think?  There don't seem to be any corresponding marks on the countershaft.  Perhaps the countershaft was replaced in the past but they chose to re-use the 1st gear?

Anyway, it doesn't seem like a big deal to me, but I figured I'd ask you before I slap everything back together.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case, if you mean the uniform, slight notches at the center of each tooth's outer face, that is typical from the machining of gears.  They are indexing marks.  If the gear were damaged from debris or loose metal, any chips would be more severe and usually isolated to one or two teeth—you would not see uniform notches at the outside of each tooth.

Traditionally, these gears were 8620 low alloy or similar metallurgy, a forging machined in an annealed state then heat treated to 0.030"-0.035" or so case hardening by carburizing method.  When a gear is case hardened and debris or sloughing occurs, the debris moving around will usually chip the tooth/teeth down into the lower hardness metal.  When metal runs through the transmission, tooth damage looks jagged in the sub-hardened metal.  

This T-19's first gear is in constant mesh with the counter gear teeth and at little risk of damage over time.  The only way to damage the first gear, beyond total load fatigue or running the transmission without oil, would be a hard parts failure and those parts circulating between gears.  Your transmission looks very "original" with nice tooth contact patterns.  You can check tooth backlash and contacts when you get the unit back together; don't be alarmed by the tolerances/backlash, an iron T-19, and other domestic truck transmissions like it, run "looser" than a close-tolerance light duty import transmission like the Jeep AX15!  When assessing a traditional gearbox like the T-19, I look for normal tooth contact patterns and absence of wear.

The non-synchromesh reverse gear and slider gear for reverse usually take the most abuse.  Drivers need to take heed:  Stop the vehicle and gears before reverse engagement!  On non-synchromesh 1st gear transmissions like vintage Jeep T-90s or even a T-18 four-speed, the same rule applies to first gear.  With the T-19, you'll need to slow down considerably but not stop.  Off-road in low range, slowing down will be even more important unless you enjoy bouncing your head off the windshield when you release the clutch pedal in low range, first gear!

Your reverse gear's tooth tips show normal wear from the non-synchromesh slide effect at the tooth engagement points.  This is nothing to cause alarm or concern unless there is tip breakage well into the sub-hardened gear material.  From what I can see, the reverse idler and reverse gear wear is not through the case hardening at this point.

Glad you're getting new brass in place...I'm still betting on a 300K mile transmission here!  Pay close attention to the synchronizer assemblies and the correct parts orientation—especially the detent plates and retainer springs.  Recall, you followed steps closely with the T-5.  Follow the T-19 assembly guidelines and sequence steps.  You'll be very pleased with the outcome...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

So today was a long slow slog toward failure.  I determined that replacing the countershaft without a dummy shaft was not going to happen, so I sanded and sanded and sanded a broom hoe handle until it was the right diameter.  After lots of fussing and fighting, I got the counter shaft in place and installed the locking plate.

I also got the gears and hubs back on the mainshaft.  I have the Novak rebuild instructions and the Ford manual.  Since the adapter shaft is from Novak, I tried to follow their instructions with respect to the reassembly.  There were a few places where their instructions don't match the Ford manual.  For instance, Novak recommends placing the mainshaft and output shaft in the case together and pressing the input and output shaft bearings simultaneously.   That seems to have been unnecessarily complicated.

I also learned that my transmission has a 23mm output shaft bearing and a 20mm input shaft bearing.  That combo was only supposed to exist up to 1979, but this transmission supposedly came from a 1985 truck.  The good news is I didn't destroy the input shaft bearing, so after wasting an hour trying to figure out why I couldn't get the bearing on far enough to get the snap ring in, I realized it wouldn't fit because it was 2-3mm wider than the old one.  I cleaned up the old one and reinstalled it.

I finally got the main and input shafts in place.  The output shaft bearing is pressed up against the reverse gear hub, and the input shaft bearing is pressed up to the oil slinger and fourth gear.  As far as I can tell, both bearings are pressed on as far as they can be.

Problem 1: With the mainshaft and input shaft in place, the gears will turn, but even with all sliders in the neutral position, everything is locked to the shaft.

I went ahead and pulled the output bearing off again and removed the output shaft.  The third gear isn't turning on the shaft. I guess I'm going to press reverse off again and start working backward until I find the problem.

Problem 2: With the output and input shafts in the case, there seems to be lots of play.  Am I correct that the adapter housing on the back and the front bearing retainer will set the spacing for those bearings?  Otherwise there doesn't seem to be anything holding the input and output shafts together.

I was pretty frustrated last night, but I'll give it a try again today.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent some more time on the transmission today. I pulled the output shaft and checked the parts order again.  One minor difference (other than length) between the Ford shaft and the adapter shaft is that the Novak adapter has a machined shoulder for a thrust surface where the Ford part uses a loose thrust washer up against a snap ring.  The thickness of the machined shoulder seems the same as the loose parts on the Ford shaft, and the placement on the shaft seems the same.  I can't see why it would make any difference.

I did determine that I had the 3/4 slider hub on backwards.  The hub is longer on one side than the other.  The way I had it, I think the slider was forcing the blocking ring against the gear.  This "engaged" 3rd gear, thereby locking everything together.

After swapping the hub and test fitting things, I reinstalled the output and input shafts and both bearings.  Everything seemed fine until I put the front bearing retainer and the adapter housing in place.  Now, there is enough pressure between input and output shafts that one or more blocking rings are providing resistance.  I think the shaft would turn in neutral with engine torque behind it, but there would definitely be some dragging.

I'm not sure if this kind of friction/resistance is typical for a big truck transmission like this, or if I have perhaps missed some kind of spacer somewhere.  Everything looks like it matches the parts diagram.  Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case...If your stack height and spacing is correct along the input/mainshaft and the counter gear, and if all gears align properly between the counter gear and the gears on the mainshaft, you could simply have a lack of lubricant issue...Did you lube the synchro ring blocking surfaces with oil?  The rings will "brake" or drag without lube, and this would be especially clear when you close the gap by installing the front bearing retainer and rear adapter.

At this point, if all parts are in place and correct order, try lubing the brass rings with a lighter lubricant like motor oil.  Using a clean oil can, squirt the oil into the space between the gear hubs and the synchro ring braking surfaces.  Rotate the input and mainshaft in opposite directions gently.  This movement will be slight, as the synchro keys/plates will keep the rings from rotating beyond a slight point, which is the purpose of the plates. When their is no friction between the steel machined gear hubs and the brass braking surfaces of these new brass rings, In neutral, the rocking will lead to actual free movement of the hub(s) within the ring(s).

If the synchro hubs are centered and the spacing is correct between gears and thrusts, you should be able to get the thin oil to penetrate.  It won't take a lot of oil to free the rings; you may need to gently pry the rings away from the gear hubs for easier oil flow.  The lighter oil will help here.

Note:  You can always dump the thin oil from the case, and ATF would even be okay for this purpose.  When you eventually fill with gear lube, dilution will dissipate any remaining motor oil or ATF.  Thinner the better for freeing these rings without the need to disassemble.  It won't require much oil, just an even film over the internal braking surfaces of the brass rings.

Once lubed and in neutral, the gears should rotate freely and allow the input and mainshaft to rotate separately and in opposite directions, back-and-forth...Let me know how this works.

Moses

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I did not pre lube the synchros.  I used assembly lube liberally on the shafts and other bearing surfaces, but not the brass.  I'll try that first thing tomorrow. It really does just feel like the synchros are grabbing, so maybe a little oil will free things up.  This thing is a BEAST to drag up into the press. I hope I can avoid disassembling for a third time!

Case

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case...I'm optimistic about the synchronizers.  They serve as "brakes" for bringing gears up to speed.  When you close gaps with the front bearing retainer and rear adapter, the brass rings can hang on the synchro hubs.  The right lubricant prevents this front happening in service.

On that note, did the front bearing retainer use a gasket?  If so, you do need the right gasket here.  Many late transmissions simply use RTV sealant.  That's okay if consistent with the OEM design and fit.  Otherwise, the gasket serves as a "shim" and allows the front bearing retainer (or rear adapter) to just capture the snap ring and not squeeze it too tightly, which could affect the gear fit.  Use the method that is OE for this unit.  Gasket or no gasket.  If you use a gasket, I like to coat it with either the traditional Permatex D300 or Gasgacinch.

As for lube, the wrong lubricant can provide too much lubricity and prevent the synchros from braking.  I discovered this years ago when on a synthetic oil kick:  Some Toyota manual transmissions would not tolerate Mobil 1 gear lube; the high lubricity prevented the synchro rings from grabbing the gear hubs!  The gear lube worked too well...Always use the recommended gear lube.  Getting creative here can cause an issue...

Let me know how this turns out.  I'll be watching for your update.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I dribbled some some 40W motor oil on the gear train. With the front bearing retainer on and the rear bearing pressed up against the O.D. snap ring, I can turn the input and output shafts independently, but there is a fair amount of resistance. At least it's no longer stuck like Chuck. Do the brass synchros seat against the gear cones and "wear in" a little?  If so I'd say I'm comfortable with where things are.  I did have the new gaskets in place while testing.

I noted that there are no shims of any kind in the mainshaft buildup for the T19. Bearing positioning seems to be a one option affair, as the O.D. snap rings on the bearings position them fore and aft in the case. I was a little surprised by this. 

Another thing that surprised me is that the gears themselves seem to each have a millimeter or two of fore/aft play on the shafts. Just a little wiggle room. Unfortunately, I didn't pay attention to whether or not this was the case prior to my work :(

Case

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case...If you can feel a slight amount of spacing between the gear hubs and brass rings, you're okay.  The rings do need to separate from the hubs when you shift the synchronizer hub to its neutral position.  If there is separation, the rings will wear normally and not drag.  They float on an oil film, which will be much more thorough than your dribbling.  The rings are likely not lubricated thoroughly.  

Break-in is minimal, normally these rings last a very long time.  The worst wear on synchronizer rings is from forced downshifts.  Think of the ring as a brake, and braking means some degree of friction.

As a point of interest, I owned a 1951 Ford F-3 pickup at the end of high school, it had a spur gear transmission with no synchronizers (last year, Ford went to the T-98 in 1952).  I taught myself to shift up and down without using the clutch, no gear clash, a feat that's possible if you "synchronize" the gears to the road and engine speed between shifts.  (You only use the clutch to stop and get into first or reverse gear, working the throttle and shifter properly once moving.)  "Double-clutching" between gears is the normal technique when driving with a spur gear transmission.

That lesson has stayed with me for 50 years and served me well as a heavy equipment operator in the 1970s.  Even today, I place the least amount of wear on a manual transmission by using the clutch and engine speed properly.  (Once rolling, I can even shift through the gears without using the clutch, without any gear or synchronizer clash and no damage to the gears or synchronizers.  Obviously, I do not recommend doing so.  Consider this is one of those "professional drivers only" stunts!  Older commercial truck drivers understand the principle.  Commercial trucks, farm equipment and off-highway heavy equipment all had non-synchronized transmissions in the day.  

Next time you drive a stick shift, pay attention to the tension created during forced downshifts, that's the synchronizer brass "blocking" ring attempting to bring the gear up to speed by braking action.  That's also the highest point of friction and wear on a synchronizer ring.  Learn to sync the engine speed and gear speed.  When downshifting, use your wheel brakes first, to slow the vehicle while still in the higher gear, then disengage the clutch and move the shifter.  Synchronizer blocking ring surfaces can easily accommodate a slight gear speed difference.

As you can see with this rebuild, you have a real iron truck transmission now...Shift like a pro, use the wheel brakes, clutch and synchronizers properly.  That's one way to get 300K-plus miles out of a T-19!

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

 Progress has been very slow lately.  I did manage to get the transmission down to the local manual transmission rebuilder.  The head tech came out and looked at the T19.  He seemed to think the resistance to turning from the synchros was acceptable, and suggested using a thicker gasket to create a hair more space from end to end.

As it turns out, I had two sets of gaskets.  One set was 1/32" and the other was 1/64".  I used the 1/32" gaskets and it seems like the shafts turn pretty smoothly.  I learned that the resistance feels much different depending on which direction the shafts are turning.  It makes sense, but I hadn't considered that the helical cut gears either force the shafts together or apart, depending on direction of rotation.  Interesting!

I got the new pilot bushing installed along with the new friction disk and pressure plate.  Many posts ago I mentioned that I was a little concerned that the T19 input shaft was slightly shorter than the T5 shaft.  I assumed that Novak new what they were doing, so I didn't worry much.  When my order arrived, the pilot bushing was much larger than the one I had been using with the T5.  I thought they had goofed up, which wouldn't be a huge surprise since I've now got a non-native engine and a different non-native transmission in this drivetrain. 

It turns out the engineers had it all figured out.  The 4.0L crankshaft has a counter bore that is quite a bit larger in diameter and is obviously shallower than the main bore the T5 pilot bushing sits in.  When placed in the counter bore, the new, large outer diameter bushing sits closer to the transmission and more than makes up for the shorter input shaft.

The hardest part of that whole job was getting the 5 month old bushing out.  I'm not exactly sure what went wrong, but that bushing had something to do with the squalling noise I had just before I pulled the T5.  Moses often talks about the applications for pilot bushings versus bearings, but I know the original T5 and the 1995 Cherokee 4.0 both used bushings, so I don't think a mix up there was the culprit.  I used every ounce of strength I had on a slide hammer with a pilot bushing puller tool.  All I did was scrape shards of bronze out.  I ended up splitting the old bushing with a cold chisel.  It popped out once it cracked into pieces.  What a hassle. I drove the new bushing in with an aluminum race driver that was larger than the bushing diameter but still fit the counter bore.  I think this ensured it is flush and square.

The newly supplied friction disk with the correct shaft bore is installed in the LuK pressure plate I just put in a few months back. Hopefully I can mate up the transmission this weekend.  I have a 4:1 kit from JB conversions waiting to go in the D300 before I put it back in place.

Since the T19 adapter supports transfer case clocking, I figured I would ask your opinion on the topic.  I can see the advantage from a ground clearance perspective, but I see two potential problems:

1. The twin sticks will be coming into the cab at a different angle if I clock the D300 up.  Seems like this could lead to issues with clearing the dash or the transmission shifter.

2. Some people claim a clocked D300 eliminates the problem they originally had with a lack of oiling if flat towed.  Maybe, but the factory installed it the way they did for some reason, and it worked fine for 130,000 miles.  Am I risking destroying a perfectly good T-case if I mess with the clocking angle?

Anyway, this has been a very slow project.  A 2 year old and a wife with a new job really slows things down, but hopefully we all think it was worth it in the end!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...I'm not a fan of transfer case clocking (upward) for exactly the reasons you cite.  The only excuse in my view is the need for extreme break-over angle clearance.  Some do it, I wouldn't unless there is a clear necessity or reason.  

As for flat towing a Jeep 4x4, I have an alternative that has worked for me:  Find a used car hauling trailer that has tandem axle brakes.  You'll be much safer, the Jeep will not have a stressed steering system, and you won't be fussing with lighting and either 1) no brakes on the Jeep or 2) an elaborate hydraulic brake system that ties between your Nissan truck and the Jeep (if these hydraulic systems have not been outlawed by now)...I bought my open (wood) deck 7500# capacity car hauling trailer for $1500 in the mid-'nineties, and it has paid for itself ten times over.  These "Texas/Oklahoma" trailers, mine happens to be a Parker, are everywhere—new or used...I'm just sayin'.

I do have a tip on the pilot bushing removal and have added the comments in a topic under General Repairs.  Years ago, I was working as a truck fleet mechanic and had a clutch job underway.  The pilot bushing was stubborn and would not come out of the crankshaft.  An older, retired mechanic shared a solution that has served me well since:

     1) Pack the crankshaft cavity and pilot bore with grease.

     2) Use an old input gear or a steel rod of the same diameter as the pilot bearing I.D.; put on your safety goggles and drive the input gear (nose end) or steel rod into the pilot bore. You can use a sand filled large plastic hammer on the back end of the input gear or a short handled steel sledge on the steel rod's end.

     3) The impact force and close fit turns the grease into a hydraulic ram.  Grease drives the bushing out from its backside.

This works especially well if the bushing has a larger O.D.  If the bushing is thin-walled, the task is more difficult.  On a caged needle bearing pilot, this may not work (grease slips past the needles and pressure drops), but it's worth a try.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I've read about using grease or wet newspaper to hydraulically blast out the pilot bushing.  I wasn't sure if that method provided more or less force than a slide hammer.  Since the slide hammer worked the last time, I tried that method.  Thankfully, the chisel method was successful. With the new bushing that has a .67 ID but almost a 2" OD, I bet your method would be great.

I did pick up a car hauler trailer a month or so ago from a colleague at work.  It needed new boards, which he bought.  He never finished putting them in and we ended up trading some items for the equivalent of about $600.  It doesn't have the proper lights for an 80+ inch wide trailer, and it has no brakes.

I've already got a complete light set with some add-on marker lights to install, new hubs, bearings, and a set of self-adjusting brakes.  I also bought a breakaway kit and one of the junction boxes to tie the light wiring and brake wiring together up at the tongue.  All in, I think I'll have about $225 cash plus the pistol I traded.  It's not pretty, but I also got some Rustoleum roll on bed liner.  I've used similar products on a few trailers previously.  It certainly holds up much better than the crappy paint most of them get from the factory.

Definitely not planning to flat tow anytime soon now that I have a trailer.  You pretty much confirmed what I was thinking about clocking the T-case.  I'm not changing the skid plate, and the new T-19 is TALL, so I really don't see and ground clearance to be gained from clocking. 

I hope to have the transmission back in this weekend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case...You'll be pleased to have the trailer.  It's so much easier to trailer than flat tow.  And much easier on a Jeep 4x4.  Great deal on the trailer.  Should be safe when you're done restoring it, too.  The Nissan/Cummins package will tow your CJ-7 on the trailer without trouble, and that's why you got the truck!

Consider using a load distribution hitch system, it's a major safety improvement.  I have a Drawtite hitch with torsion bars that's been used since the late 1980s and still works well.  You may find a used equalizing/distribution hitch for your setup.  Highly recommended.  If you adjust the bars properly, the trailer control with fresh brakes will be spot on.

Moses 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Moses,

Based on my discussion with the local manual transmission rebuilder, I did complete the rebuild of the tranmission.  With the thicker gasket as recommended by the shop, I was able to turn the output shaft by hand with some light resistance.

I had trouble reinstalling the transmission, but with the guide rods I made out of some 8" grade 5 bolts, I was successful.  I got everything lined up and in place, and had no trouble cinching the transmission front bearing retainer up into the bellhousing bore. 

Now back to the previous problem: with the transmission installed an torqued into the bellhousing, I can't turn the output shaft in neutral.  It will turn maybe 1/8 of a turn back and forth, but no further.  I suspect the synchro cones are dragging again and I'm feeling the resistance as they drag on the gears. 

The box is about 1/3 full of the correct gear oil.  I'm planning to fill from the top, since it's pretty easy to remove the top cover.  When I have the cover off, I'll do the same thing you suggested before, and see if I can gently separate the brass from the gears.  If there is still dragging, do you have any other suggestions?

There is no overall length specification for the input/output shaft, so I can't measure anything there.  I believe there are no selectable shims to be switched out in the T19 gear train, so short of pulling the Novak T-Case adapter from the rear and putting in a thicker gasket, I don't know what else I can do to generate some "wiggle room" in the gear train. 

I will also call Novak today to see if they have experienced this issue with their adapter shaft. The D300 is going back together today with the JB Conversions 4:1 gearset, so I need to make a final determination on the T19 soon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case, I like your methodical approach and also your use of guide pins to install the heavy transmission to the clutch and bellhousing...You've already confirmed that the transmission gears rotate with acceptable resistance when the transmission is alone on the bench.  Is the adapter and transfer case installed when you experience this limited gear movement in neutral?  If so, in which gear do you have the transfer case?

If the transfer case makes the difference, and if the transfer case turns freely by itself, I'd be concerned about the adapter alignment (lateral bind) and the length of the transmission output shaft going into the transfer case's input gear.  Is there bottoming of the transmission output shaft that could create bind?  Do you need more space between the transmission adapter and transfer case (or less transmission output shaft length)?  This could be measured by comparing the transmission's output shaft "stick out" length to the depth of the transfer case's input gear splines...You get the picture.

If the bind occurs with the transfer case bolted up, try loosening the transfer case some.  While keeping the transfer case on an even plane to prevent binding, attempt to rotate the transmission in neutral.

Moses

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

This occurred with just the T19 bolted up.  The D300 is in pieces on the bench :) When I was unable to turn the output shaft by itself, I took the D300 input assembly and slid it in place on the output from the transmission, being mindful of the new output shaft seal.  I thought getting something a little larger diameter than the shaft itself might give me enough torque to spin the transmission output. 

No luck.  Again, while holding onto the 3" diameter gear on the transfer case input shaft, I can rock the transmission gears back and forth a bit, but I can't get it to turn.

I heading out now to pop the top cover off and have a look inside. I'll report back if I notice anything amiss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Case, you're onto it with the 3/4 gear binding.  Something is compressing space at the back gears, and this points to the output shaft pressing forward. Is the adapter and output bearing "squeezing" the output shaft forward?  This appears like a misalignment of the output shaft: Is it moving forward due to the output bearing position or adapter position?  Consider whether the output bearing is too thick:  If so, when you install the rear adapter, the output shaft would be pushed too far forward and create bind.

Do you have the rear bearing snap ring in place?  That's the ring that would hold the output shaft in stack alignment with the other gears...Another thing that can cause this would be the output shaft's nose end binding against the pilot bore at the back of the input gear:  Like a needle roller laying over and pushing the output shaft rearward.  Or a spacer in the pilot bore.  Or a needle bearing/caged needles too long and not allowing end clearance...You get the idea.  

The input gear is in alignment due to the front bearing's snap ring and the front bearing retainer holding that gear in alignment end wise.  Try loosening the adapter slightly and see if that frees up the 3/4 gears and mechanism.  If so, the output shaft is either being squeezed forward, or this adapter shaft has a shoulder indexed at the wrong location, or the output is binding at the pilot, and so forth.

If the output shaft is custom machined and supplied with the kit, the shaft may be misaligned at the rear bearing or the pilot bearing. (You'd have to lay the OEM output shaft next to the new adapter output shaft and compare each feature.)  Also, if the input gear's backside pilot bearing assembly (the bearing that supports the nose of the output shaft) is too long, the output shaft pilot shoulder could be squeezed when you bolt up the adapter and rear bearing.  If necessary, try to measure the distance between the output bearing and the pilot nose to see whether there is adequate clearance and spacing here.

Try loosening the transmission rear adapter to take pressure off both ends of the output shaft.  Don't disassemble the entire transmission at this point.  Start by loosening the rear adapter to see whether this releases a bind. If so, begin by comparing the thickness of the output/rear bearing with the OEM bearing. 

Let me know what you find here...I'm listening.  You brief videos were very helpful by the way.

Moses 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I finally got some info back from Novak today.  Their transmission builder hit on one of your possible suggestions.  He said I should see if the input shaft snout shoulder is bottoming out on the pilot bushing or if the snout itself is hitting the bottom of the pilot bore.

The output shaft bearing external snap ring is definitely in place.  I know the bearing in the kit is intended to match the factory piece, but that is something I'll have to verify.  I hope I have the old one, as I had to grind it up to get it off!

You mentioned loosening the output adapter to see if the bind releases; I was planning to do the same thing on the other end of the transmission by loosening the bolts holding it to the bell housing and seeing when/if the shaft starts turning again.

Before I do that, I'll loosen the output adapter first with the transmission still fully bolted up and check the output shaft. 

More to follow when/if I start narrowing down the problem. 

Guess I'm gonna need some more gaskets...any preferred brand of gasket material?  I'm against the clock on this project and will probably have to make my own rather than wait for the custom gasket from Utah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...Since you have a bearing retainer and snap ring at the front, you'd need to pull the transmission back enough to loosen the front bearing retainer.  The bind is between the front bearing retainer and the rear output bearing...Loosening the rear adapter will do it.  You can leave the transmission safely attached to the bellhousing.  Since you're testing with the transmission in neutral, the input/clutch gear can remain stationary with the clutch engaged.

As for gaskets, I would visit your local NAPA store.  They have Victor sheet gasket material in various thicknesses and materials.  The catalog will specify application, and you're interested in material that resists gear lube...for sure!  They'll have exactly what you need by thickness and composition.  If you need tips on how to form a cut gasket that looks finished and works properly, just ask...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

Here is what I've accomplished this morning:

1. Loosened the output adapter; no improvement in ability to turn shaft.  I also attempted to separate synchros from 3/4 gears as in the past, but they're still squeezed tight.

2. Fully removed adapter to take some measurements.  As you can see, I have about 19 thousandths between the output bearing snap ring and the case.  Also, the output shaft snap ring moves freely on the shaft.  It's not perfectly flat, but there's up to .019 clearance there as well.  No pressure being applied by the rear half of the gear train, but the shaft is still stuck like Chuck.

3. Took a look in the case to see if anything jumped out at me.  On close inspection, it looks like the oil baffle is actually touching 4th gear, which is part of the input shaft, (is it ACTUALLY a 4th gear?  I believe this is a direct drive 4th gear transmission, not sure about the terminology). Point is, it almost looks like the baffle (and everything ahead of it) is being pushed against the gear/input shaft.  Only thing I can see that would be able to do that is the bearing.  That is actually the original bearing, so no parts compatibility issues there.

At this point I see two ways to proceed:

1. Pull the output shaft bearing so I can REALLY loosen things up and see what happens.  I'm not sure this will help much, as the shaft gets all out of alignment without the bearing and everything ends up bound anyway.  I discovered this while troubleshooting before the gearbox went back in.

2. Support the transmission and loosen the mounting bolts to see if that immediately improves the situation.  Whether it does or doesn't, I guess pulling it out is the next step.

IMG_0037.jpg

IMG_0038.jpg

IMG_0039.jpg

IMG_0040.jpg

IMG_0041.jpg

IMG_0042.jpg

IMG_0043.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I made some progress!

I loosened the four transmission to bell housing bolts about 1/8" with the transmission supported on the lift. 

1. Immediately able to turn the output shaft by hand with minimal resistance in neutral.

2. The 3/4 synchros that were squeezed against the gears before can now be wiggled with the screw driver tip as they could before the transmission was installed.

 

Please help me determine if my logic is sound in the next couple points:

1. I haven't touched the front bearing retainer, so I THINK that means it wasn't the bearing itself pushing the shaft backwards and causing the bind.

2. If #1 is correct, the only thing that could force the shaft backward is the input shaft snout bottoming on the crank.

3. Can I take a bit of the input shaft tip off safely?

4. I have no lathe or other way to make a precision cut on the input shaft, I assume if I grind it down I compromise the heat treating.  Any suggestions?  Machine shops seem to be few and far between around here for some reason.

 

Let me know if I'm missing something obvious.  I'm not seeing many other possibilities, except PERHAPS the input shaft shoulder where the splines stop hitting the new pilot bushing, though I think that shoulder is actually covered by the input shaft.

Gonna pull the transmission the rest of the way.  Maybe I'll get lucky and see some grease transferred between some surfaces that will clearly indicate what's hitting what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm at a loss. 

First, it looks like the input shaft may be bottoming out on the center hub of the friction disk (that came from the adapter manufacturer and is supposed to be correct) I guess I might have the disk in backwards...

Next, even with the transmission sitting on the bench, it just seems like it's too tight with the output shaft pushed in until the bearing retainer ring hits the case.  It's tough to turn, and ANY pressure on the input shaft end jams things right up.  Even just trying to hold the input shaft still while I spin the output shaft and the synchros engage and lock everything together.  I verified the output bearing is the same thickness as the original, 22.9mm and as I said the input bearing is the original.

I'm starting to worry that the adapter output shaft is machined slightly different than the Ford output shaft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that was a lot of pain for nothing.  Rear output shaft bearing was 1/16" shy of being fully seated.  In other words, there was 1/16" too much shaft sticking into the case.  It was jamming up the whole works.  Took a complete disassembly, but I'm please that I found the culprit AND that I didn't just try to run it as it was!

Onto the reassembly of the D300, now that the correct gear has arrived!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

I followed your posts, Case, and your ultimate finding made perfect sense.  This solution reflects my concern around the rear bearing being too thick.  It wasn't, but without the bearing being seated on the shaft, you had essentially the same issue.  This was also why I suggested measuring from the rear bearing to the front bearing and comparing that length to the OEM output shaft.  My concern was whether the parts were "too long".  With the rear bearing riding too far back, they were...Yea, you got it!

Quick questions:  1) Is there enough end clearance for the input shaft through the clutch disk hub and the crankshaft pilot bearing, no "bottoming"? 2) Did you have a snap ring wide enough to fill the rear bearing groove on the output shaft?  (You showed a gap at the rear bearing snap ring-to-bearing inner race in a photo above.)  Did you have a snap ring wide enough to fill that groove and retain the bearing securely?

This is all worthwhile despite the extra time and effort.  You are now thoroughly versed on the T19, think about how fast you were able to disassemble and re-assemble the parts!  The output shaft should turn freely and smoothly now...Glad you did not attempt to pull the assemblies together and run it.  Good judgment call.  The synchronizer rings would have broken, perhaps more.

Glad to see your good news...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

Thanks for keeping an eye on my progress.  To answer your questions:

1. There is enough depth (+3/8" or so) to the pilot bore of the crankshaft for the input shaft, if that is what you meant.  I took all those measurements when I had it out.

2. I have a new snap ring on the output shaft, good to go now.

I got everything back in place finally.  Lots of trial and error since this transmission requires new spacing for the mount on the skid plate, and the position of the transfer case shift levers is higher relative to the transmission tunnel.

I got ready to take it for a quick trial run tonight, and the good news is the engine fired up after 3+ months.  Unfortunately, it won't go into gear while running.  It shifts fine while off.  I double checked the heim joint mechanical clutch linkage and took out most of the free play, just for troubleshooting purposes.  Seems like the clutch isn't releasing enough to let the transmission shift into gear.  It will start to grind if I attempt to go into reverse. 

I really thought I had this thing licked...not sure what else to try, but it's not happening tonight or this week, most likely.  The better half is tired of being a garage widow and babysitting the toddler!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've done some more reading and found another couple things that might cause the symptoms I'm seeing.  Essentially, it looks like there are a couple of reasons why the input shaft might be binding in the crankshaft pilot.

1. Pilot bushing is too small for the input shaft: I'm 99.9% sure I test fit the new bushing, especially since it looked so different because it was designed to fit in the outer, larger diameter bore in the crankshaft.  Also, the clutch alignment tool went easily through the clutch and into the pilot, so I don't think that's it.

2. Misalignment of the transmission to the crankshaft.  Some of what I've read indicates that if it was necessary to use the transmission mount bolts to "pull" the transmission into the bell housing, that's a symptom if misalignment which can cause the input shaft to bind in the pilot bushing, preventing the input shaft from matching speeds with the transmission gears and causing the symptoms I'm experiencing.

It WAS necessary to pull the transmission into the bell housing, but ONLY the last 1/4" or so.  The front bearing retainer outer diameter was a pretty tight fit into the bellhousing, so I assumed that's what I was feeling.  As for the initial "push" of the transmission into the bellhousing, it went easily once the splines and angles were lined up.  What I had to do was "wiggle, wiggle, twist" and it slid right up to the bellhousing.  Doesn't seem like much of a potential for binding there.

One thing I DIDN'T do was mess with the bellhousing alignment dowels.  Was that a mistake?  I don't really understand how to check all those measurements...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...If the block dowels and bellhousing dowel holes are in place and not misshaped, the bellhousing should be in alignment.  Your description of mating up the weighty transmission sounds normal.  If this is the right Jeep bellhousing for the T19, the front bearing retainer should index on center.  This doesn't sound like input shaft offset here.

Note:  Avoid doing this unless you have no other options, you've done plenty of work already: If you need to confirm that the input shaft is on center with the crankshaft, make an accurate template of the transmission's front face, using paper gasket material. (I can suggest how to get a very accurate gasket impression/cutout.)  The template/gasket should have an accurate cutout for the front bearing retainer and also have accurate bolt hole cutouts.  Once you've made this template, carefully place it against the bellhousing face to confirm that parts line up.  (The template is not a permanent gasket, it's just a measurement tool.)  Additionally, with the transmission front bearing retainer removed from the transmission, you can place the retainer into the bellhousing hole squarely (retainer flange flush and uniform with bellhousing face) and confirm whether the crankshaft pilot bearing appears to align with the center of the retainer.  If the front bearing retainer fits into the bellhousing bore, with the retainer on center with the crankshaft pilot bearing bore, and the transmission bolt holes align, the input gear and its splines should be aligned.  This also assumes that the pilot bearing is not binding or grabbing the input gear's nose.

Since you have mechanical clutch linkage, you can observe (through the release arm boot) how the release bearing and clutch cover fingers when the pedal is depressed by a helper (toddler too young, garage widow could be fed up!).  You likely won't see the cover's pressure plate move away from the disk but can see the fingers move and how much.

It is doubtful that the clutch disk is flipped backward, which would cause both disk distortion and binding.  You can rule this out, right?  

How much free play do you have at the release arm?  Is the release bearing pushing the clutch cover fingers far enough?  Any reason to suspect that the clutch disk hub is warped or cocked?  Any friction disk drag on the flywheel or pressure plate could cause a problem. Is the clutch disk of correct diameter for the clutch cover pressure plate?

After confirming sufficient clutch pedal and cover finger movement, you could point the Jeep down the driveway and crank over the engine in low range and 1st gear of the T19.  Once the engine fires and the Jeep is moving, try disengaging the clutch with the pedal.  If you can move the T19 shifter now without issue, you have freed up whatever was binding. (Should this end the problem, bets are that the pilot bushing was grabbing the transmission's input gear nose.)  If the clutch still will not disengage and the shifter sticks in gear, be ready to shut the engine off to stop the vehicle (avoid locking the steering column in the process!)—plan a successful/safe return to the garage to prevent an incident.  Make sure toddler is safely inside the house while attempting this maneuver! 

Don't clash the gears on your fresh rebuild.  Starting the engine with the transmission in gear will eliminate the risk of damage. In low range and 1st gear or reverse, the reduction is so low that the starter motor won't suffer.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the better half and I spent a couple minutes in the garage early this morning while the room mate was still asleep.  I watched the release fingers and bearing while she operated the clutch. To answer some of your questions:

1. I adjusted out essentially all the free play in the linkage.  Obviously I can't drive it with the bearing basically resting on the release fingers, but I was trying to eliminate lack of travel as a cause. That was done before my last post with no results.

2.  With Lesley moving the clutch pedal through it's full travel, my guestimate is the release bearing is moving about 1/2" fore and aft on the bearing retainer tube.  The release fingers I can see on this side of the clutch are moving smoothly inwards.  No odd noises or any indication of binding.

3. You asked about friction disk size.  This IS NOT a matched friction disk/pressure plate set anymore.  When I rebuilt the T5, I installed a LuK friction disk and pressure plate that were a matched set.  I couldn't reuse that friction disk with the T19 because the input shafts are 1/16" different in diameter.  This friction disk came from Novak per their recommendation knowing what transmission and engine combination I had.  Before I installed it, I laid the friction disk against the flywheel.  It pretty much lined up with the marks left by the previous disk.  I also set it onto the pressure plate.  I think it was a tiny bit larger in diameter than the friction surface of the pressure plate, but it wasn't going to interfere with any bolts or other parts of the cover that I could see.  I didn't have any difficulty installing the friction disk and pressure plate. Not a problem I think, but not one I could 100% rule out either.

If I get home from work at a reasonable time today, I may try to get the Jeep out in the driveway to try the bump start method.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...The start in gear (low range, 1st gear) could tell the tale.  Once rolling (slowly), depress the clutch pedal while in 1st gear and raise engine rpm slightly, then release the throttle and try shifting.  If this works, I would suspect that the pilot bearing is/was dragging on the input gear's nose, or the clutch disk may have/had a high spot or raised friction material.

Question:  Is your flywheel surface flat?  Was it resurfaced?  Was the pressure plate flat and still in prime shape?  This shouldn't be an issue if the clutch did not shudder before the clutch disk change.  However, if there is warp or a lip on the cover pressure plate or the flywheel face, the disk could be dragging.

1/2" of finger movement should certainly be enough to release the clutch.  Let's see what happens...

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Copy all Moses.  I'll be very careful with the start.  I guess those new 4:1 gears will at least keep the speed of the Jeep under control!

As for the flywheel, it was resurfaced back when I did the T5 rebuild.  It was smooth and still had the diamond hone finish on it.  I doubt the new clutch had 250 miles on it.  Pressure plate also still looked brand new.

Case

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...Crossing fingers that it's simply the pilot bushing with a slight bind!  On that note, did you add any grease to the bushing during the installation?  Behind the bushing?  Is it an Oilite type "self-lubricating" bronze/brass bushing?  Was this a Novak part?

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I just got done trying out the start in gear trick.  No luck.  That new crawl ratio with the 5.1:1 1st gear and 4:1 transfer case ratio is pretty great, I just wish I could shift!

It started right up and crawled forward, but pushing the clutch in had no effect.  I could pull it out of gear, but had to shut down to put it back into 1st.  No combination of throttle or clutch pedal seemed to change anything.

The pilot bushing is an Oilite bushing that I soaked for about a week before installation.  I did not add any grease. The bushing came from Novak and was recommended for the 4.0/T-19 combination.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Umm...Your transmission seems fine, you can separate/shift gears and do the bump start, right?  No creep in neutral either, right?

If so, you're very correct to assume the problem is forward of the transmission as:  1) the clutch disk not separating from the flywheel face and pressure plate with the pedal depressed, 2) bind of the input gear in the pilot bearing, or 3) a long shot but you brought it up, the possibility that the input gear is somehow not aligned with the crankshaft center line—which would bind or cock the input gear in the pilot bearing.  

From your description of the transmission going into the clutch disk and mating with the bellhousing, nothing sounded that unusual, but you did have 1/4" of resistance at the end.  This could be simply a snug fit of the bearing retainer into the bellhousing bore.  This does not sound like a clutch spline issue unless the clutch disk is in place backward.  Did it take excessive force to tighten the clutch cover over the disk?  If the disk hub is in backward and interfering with the flywheel or flywheel bolts, the disk would be bowed and likely create more resistance when tightening the cover bolts.

It's tough to install the disk backward, but that can happen, and in some instances, the recess of the flywheel is deep enough to accommodate most of the disk hub (which is backward and facing toward the crankshaft).  The remaining squeeze might go unnoticed, and the end result is a disk that is bowed and under tension.  It cannot separate from the flywheel and/or the pressure plate.

One way to confirm this without removing the transfer case and transmission would be removal of the starter motor.  Using a smaller extension/automotive mirror, look at the side view of the flywheel, clutch disk and the clutch cover pressure plate.  If necessary, have Lesley depress the clutch pedal while you look on.  (You could use a prop rod to hold the clutch pedal down as an alternative.)  Confirm whether or not you see the disk free up from the clutch cover pressure plate and the flywheel.  If the disk remains under tension, more likely at the cover pressure plate, the disk is in backward.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went out after the little guy went to bed and stuck my inspection camera through the clutch fork opening. It seems that the friction disk hub is touching the end of the front bearing retainer tube.  Not sure if that's an issue.  I noticed that it was going to be close when I pulled the transmission this weekend. I put a straight edge across the bell housing opening and measured down to the clutch hub and into the pilot bore to verify there was enough depth to accommodate the entire input shaft length without bottoming.

From those measurements, it looked like the retainer tube was going to be very close to the clutch hub.  Looks like it actually touches, but no way to tell if it's just contact or something squeezed.

I'll use that camera tomorrow and run the test you mentioned above. In preparation for possibly pulling the whole shebang back out, I'm contemplating a way to bolt the skid plate directly to the transmission jack I have and pull the tranny, case and skid plate out as one unit. Neither the transmission nor tcase are very stable on the lift by themselves, especially with that handy 23 degree clocking of the D300. If I can bolt the whole mess to the lift, I think it will be safer to handle, even if the combined weight is more. Just thinking ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...Sounds like you may be on to something.  If the hub and friction disk are squeezed against the flywheel face, the clutch would remain "engaged" in a sense.  If that last 1/4" of resistance when you install the transmission turns out to be the bearing retainer sleeve pinning the clutch disk to the flywheel, the tension would be enough to "engage" the clutch.  The splined disk must be able to separate from the flywheel and pressure plate face when the pressure plate retracts (clutch pedal depressed).  Worth a closer look.

Footnote: With the hub and disk spinning against the bearing retainer's front end, you should hear some kind of noise. Definite friction here if this turns out to be the problem. 

If it turns out that the retainer length is the issue and not the disk hub design or which way it's facing, determine how much throw you need to keep the release bearing stable, then mark the retainer for shortening.  This is a casting and can be cut with a liquid-cooled power hacksaw or on a lathe to avoid overheating.  Be certain that the release bearing collar can go to full travel without running off the retainer sleeve.

Your idea of taking out the transmission/transfer case and skid plate as a unit could make sense.  You need to first brace the transmission and transfer case to set stably on the skid plate.  Stacking and wedging blocks of wood at either end of the assembly might be one approach.  You don't want this mass to rock on the transmission mount.  Tie this all down, ratcheting tie-down straps would do it; secure the assembly solidly to the transmission jack, and keep the weight as centered as practical.  This is a lot of weight, but if balanced and securely perched on the transmission floor jack, it would save a lot of time in both the removal and installation...use care and caution.  Lots of iron here! 

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we're getting somewhere! Turns out you would be surprised how little additional noise a clutch hub makes as it eats a bearing retainer.

I couldn't actually see anything very useful even after I pulled the starter and the inspection cover off the flywheel dust shield, so I went ahead and dropped the skid plate, transmission and transfer case.  I could smell carnage as soon as the transmission started to pull away from the bell housing.  The clutch hub is rubbing on the bearing retainer sleeve.  As you can see in the pictures, the chamfered lip of the hub actually wore a corresponding groove in the circumference of the bearing retainer sleeve, and turned the metal blue (about 640 F, I believe?).  I haven't pulled the bell housing, but after looking very carefully at the face of the clutch that faces aft, I don't see the stamped in "THIS SIDE TOWARD FLYWHEEL" message that I know is on the clutch.  I'm fairly confident I have the correct side facing out.

Is there anything else I would be able to see from the stage of disassembly that would confirm conclusively that the friction disk is facing the right way?  Other than a little grease on the hub from the retainer sleeve, everything looks good in there and I'd rather not pull the rest of it apart.

Tomorrow or Friday I'm going to take some careful measurements to figure out exactly how much of the sleeve to trim off.  Glad I didn't run it much longer or I might have been buying a new bearing retainer.

IMG_0046.jpg

IMG_0045.jpg

IMG_0044.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

60Bubba...Nailed it!  Odd that nobody (Novak in particular) mentioned this lengthy retainer feature of the T19 when used with the OE type Jeep bellhousing and this conversion.  Could be the disk hub stickout.  You have a helpful footnote and photos to share with Novak.  May be the retainer, the disk hub or both when doing this conversion.

As for the disk direction, simple:  The end of the splined hub facing the flywheel should be the shallower side.  You should be able to reach through the disk splines and feel that the flywheel side is away from the crankshaft flange, bolts and flywheel center.  The splined hub typically has a standout side that faces the retainer, and this should be obvious.  It would be the section that chewed up the retainer.

Take a photo(s) of the disk hub in place, I'll confirm...If the disk is otherwise undamaged and not bowed, you should be on the home stretch once you modify the retainer's length.  Shorten for the necessary clearance and make sure the T.O. bearing's collar does not ride off the retainer when the clutch fingers depress under normal clutch travel.

The new disk is at maximum thickness, so the T.O. bearing is currently riding as far forward on the retainer as it will.  As the clutch disk wears, the cover fingers will set rearward; clutch adjustment will pull the T.O. bearing back.

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

I managed to squeeze in some work last night and this morning. Pulled everything last night. I did end up with one big 'ole unit. I think overall that was the best method. My transmission jack is junk, so if I ever have to do this again, I need to get a heavier duty model. Wish I could rent that sort of thing locally. 

Today I measured from the bell housing mount surface down to the clutch fingers. Using the roughly .5" throw I measured before, I worked out how long the retainer sleeve needed to be to support the bearing throughout the throw. Being conservative, I was able to remove 1cm of sleeve.  That left some extra length in case my measurements were off, but left plenty of clearance for the clutch hub. 

I ultimately didn't trust my memory about the direction of the clutch, so I pulled the bell housing in an abundance of caution. It was definitely facing the right way.

Reinstalling the transmission and transfer case as one unit was a challenge. I had to be very slow and methodical. The only hang up I had was that the tranny was in 4th gear when I pulled the shifter, so the input wouldn't rotate and let the splines lines up. Once I discovered that, everything went together smoothly. 

After double checking all the connections, I fired it up. Shifts smooth as butter! Actually, it shifts like a dump truck, but the clutch is great! I still need to get a new straight shifter cane and custom bend it as well as cutting and installing the new transmission tunnel cover.

Driving with the tunnel cover off, I noticed some gear whine in 4th gear. Could be the different transmission, lack of the sound attenuation from the tunnel cover, or a hidden gremlin. I'm sure I'll be paranoid about every new sound for the next 10,000 miles, but it seems like I'm back in business. 

Thanks again for your knowledge and more importantly for your encouragement.  Not sure I would have been confident enough of my diagnoses to move forward. 

Case

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

I'm thrilled!  This is how I envisioned the end result...Congrats, Case!  Lesley and toddler should be relieved to have you back in their lives.  Time to go family (safe) wheeling!  You've got extraordinary reduction gearing now, should draw a big smile.  Just remember to brake more in low range before downshifting to the lower gears.

How did you shorten the retainer end?...Noisier is not uncommon with a truck box, and you're spot on:  attenuation with the tunnel cover removed is a huge factor!  Break this down in your logical mind as to tone and note.  If not grating or grinding, or bearing whining, you likely have nothing more than a very large cluster/counter gear spinning without load in 4th gear.

You'll be accustomed to this "real truck" gearbox in no time.  I'm curious how you like the T-19 synchromesh in 1st gear?  Can you start out effectively in second gear for most highway/street driving?  The 1st gear synchromesh is a significant advantage over the T-18 without synchromesh in 1st.  Finding this box was a coup.

Yea!

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses,

Since I decided to remove the bellhousing to check conditions in there, I had the perfect tool for marking the sleeve.  After I measured how much I wanted to remove, I slid the throwout bearing over the sleeve and used it as a guide and used a sharp piece of wire to scribe the retainer sleeve. 

I made a rough cut with the angle grinder and a cutoff wheel.  I then slid the retainer over the dummy countershaft I used for the transmission reassembly.  I used the counter shaft as a spindle so I could turn the retainer against my bench grinder and slowly work down to the mark I scribed.  I finished up with a file and used a small stone on my dremel to chamfer the fresh cut.  I smoothed everything out with some 400 grit.  It was nice and smooth and I think fine since this is not a rotating component where perfect balance is essential. Necessity is the mother of invention.

I used first to start out the few times I drove it.  I think that's mostly habit, but it certainly isn't too low to be useful.  I started in second in the driveway one time.  I'd say it's between the T5 with 3.31 gears and the T5 with 4.10 for ease of starting.  It's definitely going to be roaring at highway speeds, but then I knew that was the trade off.  Given the cost and complexity of an AX-15 swap (and lack of a low first gear) I still think this was the right choice.

Looking forward to the first off road run next weekend!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Should work fine, Case—innovative!  You will value this transmission off-pavement.  The tire diameter and axle gearing justify the lack of an overdrive gear.  Instead, you now have a massively more reliable transmission with the versatility of exceptional reduction gearing...Keep us posted!

Moses 

Link to post
Share on other sites

First shakedown of the new transmission, transfer case gears, winch and rock sliders.  All were thoroughly abused--I mean tested this weekend.  Everything seems to have come back in one piece.  I may drain the transmission and transfer case just to check for metal particles to make sure nothing is going wrong in there.

Here are a few shortened clips from the trails at Hawk Pride Off Road in Tuscumbia, Alabama.  I think this one was listed as a Level 3.  We finished up on a Level 4 called Diamondback, but I was somewhat busy for that one, so not many videos!

 

HPO2017_1.M4V

HPO2017_2.M4V

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

You've gotta be overjoyed with this level of reduction gearing!  Yes!

You can protect your chassis and powertrain way better now...Not to mention the safer control for family outings!

Moses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...